|
Super Moderator
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Anwhere far away from the cabalistas
Posts: 7,416
|
Nice article!
From the telegraph originally:-
Quote:
Local election 2008: What pundits really say
By George Bridges
Swings, marginals, percentage shares, second votes: prepare to be bamboozled by political mumbo jumbo as pundits get to grips with the results of the local and London elections.
With their activists deactivated, political leaders will mobilise the most powerful force of all - the English language.
For several years I helped to prepare “lines to take” - statements to trot out in reaction to various election outcomes - for John Major, Michael Howard and David Cameron.
In the 1990s, this was the political equivalent of writing a regimental war diary for the First Battle of Ypres, then the Second, then the Somme, then Passchendaele.
On Friday mornings, after a drubbing in the polls on the Thursday (and there were a few), ministers would tour the newsrooms, delivering our “take” on the results.
When drafting the briefing, one had to heed the advice of Lewis Carroll’s Humpty Dumpty: “When I choose a word, it means just what I choose it to mean, neither more or less”.
As the story had it, this left Alice rather perplexed, so Humpty Dumpty explained: “They’ve a temper, some of them - particularly verbs: they’re the proudest - adjectives you can do anything with, but not verbs - however, I can manage the whole lot of them! Impenetrability! That’s what I say!”
Somewhere in Downing Street today, someone is preparing Humpty Dumpty-style lines for Gordon. If the polls are anything to go by, those words need to be impenetrable enough to stymie an Enigma machine.
If the poor soul writing them does his or her job properly, you will be baffled. You will be none the wiser.
For if Labour lose the elections, they will aim for a score-draw in the battle of perception. So, in the spirit of Freedom of Information, here’s a short decryption of some of the spin.
First, the oldest trick in the book. “If you look at East Tiddlypush, you’ll see our share of vote actually increased compared with 2004.” What’s so special about East Tiddlypush, you may ask?
Nothing. The party under pressure will focus on one council that it claimed it never had a chance of winning, and portray its win as complete outright victory.
Next, the classic Double Cross line. “These results are better than the 200 or 300 seat losses that were predicted by some in the media.”
The “some in the media” actually refers to the party’s own spin doctors, who will have fed absurdly low and pessimistic predictions of losses to the media weeks ago to dampen expectations. We tried this in the 1990s, except by the end we hardly had any more councils to lose.
Then there’s the rationalisation attempt. “Mid-term elections are always difficult. 1987, 1990, 2004 - governments can come back to win in general elections.”
Coming back is made to sound so easy, a natural inevitability - which is precisely the purpose. It is a line designed to steady the nerves and to tell twitchy backbenchers: “Hey, this is all part of our 200-year plan. We mapped it on our grid back in 1996.” Of course you did.
I would be most surprised if we don’t hear what’s known as “Annie’s line”: “Yes, we are going through a difficult time. But I’m not interested in today’s or tomorrow’s headlines. What matters is the long-term future of this country.”
Remember the song from the musical? “Tomorrow, tomorrow, I love you, tomorrow, you’re always a day away.” Politicians love to focus on the long term as the sun definitely won’t come out tomorrow, next week or next year.
A variant on this is “Let’s get the facts straight”. It means anything but.
It continues: “I suspect people are feeling the pinch. But we have to remind them that people on median earnings have seen their real disposable income rise by 10 per cent in real terms during the last decade.”
When ministers chant statistics, they have lost it.
Listen out for the call for unity, too; it spells certain death. “The message from these results is clear: now is the time to unite, to protect our achievements, to fight for what we believe, to remember our core purpose.”
If you hear a political leader cry “unite”, you know he has checked into the Westminster departure lounge, boarding pass in hand, waiting to be called by the Great Returning Officer in the sky. The only reason to unite is to protect the past, because no one can agree what to do from tomorrow onwards.
And if things are worse even than expected: “Clearly these are disappointing results. Of course we will listen and reflect.”
Disappointing? More like a disaster.
The Government is on the floor, gasping for breath, having been kneed in the ballots. “Listen”, “reflect” - these are the tell-tale signs of a government that is beholden to events, not controlling them.
So my advice is don’t look at any one council, think about the long term or expect to be “listened to” this weekend. Instead, watch politicians on TV with the sound off, and ask yourself “Whom do I trust most?”
My gut tells me that millions of people have already made up their minds. Tomorrow just may be Gordon Brown’s Pickfords van moment: time to book the removal men for 2010.
Once a prime minister is “in office, but not in power”, he needs a dramatic gesture to regain control. John Major put his leadership to a vote and challenged his party to “put up, or shut up”.
Now that’s a line everyone understood - but I doubt it will be included in Gordon’s lines to take.
|
__________________
--------------------------------------------------
Users on ignore list: None. I've got to have people to laugh at.
Cowardly Posters* list: BobFM, Bellatrix.*People who post personal insults then refuse to reply
.
|
02-05-2008, 06:12 PM
Linear Mode
